House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2004, with 35% of the vote.
The Environment December 13th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I am used to these cheers of encouragement from all sides of the House.
I am very pleased that the Species at Risk Act was approved by Parliament and was yesterday given Royal Assent. This has been a commitment in three Speeches from the Throne and two red books.
I must add that, at almost the same time yesterday, the Senate also gave its approval to the resolution on the Kyoto protocol and ratification of the Kyoto protocol.
The Environment December 13th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that the Species at Risk Act—
Kyoto Accord December 10th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, the state of California, part of the American union, has in fact adopted measures which are quite different from many other states in the union for automobiles.
The concerns of the president of GM Canada are being taken into account. We intend to have conversations with them. There is nothing that suggests that ratification of Kyoto will automatically lead to the situation described by the hon. member.
Kyoto Protocol December 10th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, the discussions that took place surrounding budget 2000, action plan 2000, plus budget 2001, indicated very clearly where these measures would be and what their costs would be.
In no way are these costs that the hon. member talked about, the $1.6 billion, related exclusively to promoting Kyoto. They are in fact designed to make sure that we in good time achieve our Kyoto targets and ramp up effectively and without dislocation to the 2008-12 period.
Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002
Yes, the Alliance members applaud the filibuster. They like the filibuster because they know the inevitable result of a filibuster must be a time allocation motion like the one we are discussing at this time.
Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002
Madam Speaker, I do not know whether that is just an assertion of the hon. member or a question. I will take it as a question.
We decided to proceed with ratification in the year 2002. That decision was made in June 2001, some 18 months ago. There is nothing rushed about this. It was confirmed that there would be a debate and a vote in the House. That was confirmed two months ago. As has been mentioned frequently it is not essential prior to ratification but it is important to have the views of members.
I wish to comment on the original point of the hon. member. When we have one member out of the 301 members of the House speaking for eleven and a half hours in debate, it is a filibuster.
Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002
Madam Speaker, the first steps will of course be to continue with the discussions we are currently having with the provinces and territories to ensure that we do in fact move forward collectively as 14 governments, and to continue with the discussions we are having with industry which, as the hon. member is well aware, took place as recently as last weekend.
We will continue with that to ensure that what we do has minimum impact upon the economic future of Canada and achieves the goal of greenhouse gas reductions at the minimum cost to the Canadian economy.
Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002
Madam Speaker, the hon. member talked about various burdens, but the burden must be considered in a specific context. How can any industry reduce greenhouse gas? It is not simply a matter of level. It is a matter of knowing what that industry can do to reduce its emissions.
This is a difficult decision. Obviously, we did this for the heating oil industry. It was beneficial for that industry.
I am waiting for other industries to indicate that they also have special interests that must be considered. It is clear that we did a few things for the oil industry, including a 300% increase in tar sands production and a 400% increase in production off the coasts of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland.
Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002
The hon. member for Saanich--Gulf Islands, who is still shouting after your warning, Madam Speaker, has failed to understand that there is a plan. If he looks at page 31 he will see listed in the body of it the information concerning illustrative costs for selected industries, et cetera. If he turns to the annex on pages 57 to 67, he will find 10 pages dealing with cost analysis. He will also learn that the basis for the cost analysis was done by agreement with the provinces and territories and that all 14 governments agreed to the approach for analyzing costs.
Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002
Madam Speaker, the hon. member has a real problem. Having decided that there is no plan, he therefore has taken no time to read the plan.